Penny Tompkins and James Lawley

Introduction

The following sections summarise over ten years of
experience of informal modelling, undertaking formal modelling projects and
training modelling. Our ideas are presented as working notes and
guidelines rather than a finished article. We intend to keep updating
and expanding these notes. Please let us know
if you think there is something we should add. All contributions
will be credited.

If this is your first attempt at conducting a modeling project
(perhaps you are on an NLP Master Practitioner course) remember, your
primary outcome is to become familiar with the basics of NLP
modelling. Until you have
completed your first project from start to finish you will not know
what is involved.

Your evidence that you have achieved your learning-to-model
outcome will come in four forms, each demonstrating a higher level of
competency. In our opinion, demonstrating the minimum criteria
specified below fulfils the requirement for NLP Master Practitioner
certification and anything else you gain is a bonus.

The MINIMUM is that you:

(a) Demonstrate you have acquired a model of modelling
that enables you to:

- Specify, plan and implement your modelling project

- Gather information appropriate to the outcome of the project

- Construct and document a model from the information gathered

- Test model's effectiveness at reproducing the required
results.

(b) Describe the difference having learned to model makes to you.

PREFERABLY you will also demonstrate that you can use the model
you have constructed to reproduce results similar to your
exemplar(s).

CONCEIVABLY, you will demonstrate that you can devise an approach
which enables others to acquire your model and facilitate them to
acquire it.

ULTIMATELY, you will demonstrate that the acquirers are able to
reproduce results similar to your exemplar(s).

Why Model?

We are right behind David Gordon and Graham Dawes when they say:

Modeling is a doorway into the vast storehouse of
human experience and abilities, providing access to anyone willing to
turn the key. For the individual who pursues modeling, this means:

Access to an ever-widening range of new experiences and
abilities.

An increasing ability to bring those experiences and
abilities to others.

A finer understanding of the structure underlying unwanted
experiences and behaviors so that you know precisely what to
change in those experiences and behaviors.

Ever-increasing flexibility in your experience and responses.

A growing appreciation of the beauty to be found in the
patterns of human experience.

There is an excellent article, Why Model? by Joshua M. Epstein's based on his 2008 keynote address to the Second World Congress on Social
Simulation.

Learning to Model

Modelling, and learning to model, are highly systemic processes.
Modelling is a type of learning, and therefore learning to model is
'learning to learn'.

You will realise very quickly that modelling is an iterative
process. That is, the results of each activity feed back into other
processes, which are modified by the new input. The now modified
processes feed forward to the next operation, which feeds back, and
so on. For example:

I decide on an outcome for my modelling project. This largely
determines the information I gather from my first exemplar. The
learning that comes from gathering that information means I change
the emphasis of my outcome. Both the revised outcome and the learning
from the first gathering of information influences how I gather
information from my second exemplar. This in turn may alter my
outcome, it may help me to see some gaps in the information gathered
from my first exemplar, and will certainly influence how I gather
information from my third exemplar, and so on, and so on.

Learning to be comfortable with not-knowing, an abundance of
information and ambiguity about what to pay attention to, especially in the beginning
of a modelling project are prerequisites for becoming a master
modeller.

What constitutes a modelling project?

In general, almost anything that interests or excites you enough
to want to acquire another way of doing, being, feeling, thinking,
believing, etc. We recommend you go for something that will really
make a difference in your life - and/or others' lives too.

Having said that there are some practical constraints (aren't
there always?):

You need to have completed enough of your modelling to
be able to demonstrate your learning and competence by the end of the
programme.

You need to choose a topic where you have sufficient access to
your exemplars.

And you need to remember that your primary purpose is to
demonstrate you are learning how to model. The project is the primary
means by which you will acquire that learning and then be able to
demonstrate your learning.

As a minimum, you need to show that you can model patterns of:

External behaviourInternal states
Internal processes

One of the most interesting parts of the process will be selecting
the 'chunk size' of the project. This will require you to balance
your desire to acquire some big chunk skill with the resources
available within the time scales. As a general rule, people learning
to model initially overestimate what they can achieve (i.e. they bite
off too big a chunk) and they underestimate the value of modelling a
small chunk in depth.

It's OK to start with a big chunk outcome and refine it as the
project progresses. In fact, it is common not to discover "the
difference that makes the difference " (Bateson) until well
into the process. But when you do, that piece should become the focus
of your project.

.

How to do a Modelling Project - Section 3

What is a Modelling Project?

Modelling is a process whereby an observer, the modeller, gathers
information about the activity of a system with the aim of
constructing a generalised description (a model) of how that system
works. The model can then be used by the modeller and others to
inform decisions and actions.

The purpose of modelling is to identify
'what is' and how 'what is' works to produce the observed results - without influencing what is being
modelled. The modeller begins with an open mind, a blank sheet and an
outcome to discover the way a system functions - without attempting
to change it.

[Note: We recognise this is an
impossible outcome, since the observer, by simply observing,
inevitably influences the person being observed. However this does
not affect the intention of a modeller to not influence.]

Steven Pinker in How the Mind Works (p. 21) uses an analogy from
the world of business to define psychology, but he could just as
easily be describing the modelling process:

Psychology is engineering in reverse.
In forward-engineering, one designs a machine to do something; in
reverse-engineering, one figures out what a machine was designed to
do. Reverse-engineering is what the boffins at Sony do when a new
product is announced by Panasonic, or vice versa. They buy one, bring
it back to the lab, take a screwdriver to it, and try to figure out
what all the parts are for and how they combine to make the device
work.

Pinker is not saying that people are machines. He is saying the
process of making a model of human language, behaviour and perception
can be likened to the process of reverse-engineering.

When 'the system' being observed is a person, what usually gets
modelled is behaviour that can be seen or heard (sensory modelling),
or thinking processes that are described through language (conceptual
modelling). Figuring out how great tennis players serve is an example
of the former, while identifying their beliefs and strategies for
winning is an example of the latter.

Domains

The field of NLP (Neuro-Linguistic Programming)
was established as a result of several modelling projects conducted
by Richard Bandler and John Grinder. They, in collaboration with others such as
Judith DeLozier, Leslie Cameron-Bandler, David Gordon, Robert Dilts did much of the original work to codify the process of modelling sensory and conceptual domains.

The outcome (of a pattern of behaviour) which can be described in
sensory specific terms.

The model

An abstract formulation constructed from the information
gathered from modelling the exemplar(s) which when actioned
by an acquirer produces a similar class of results.

Exemplar

The person (or group or organisation) that consistently
achieves the results the modeller is seeking to reproduce.
(In the early days of NLP, also
referred to as 'a model'.)

Modeller

The person who gathers information from the exemplar,
constructs the model, and tests its effectiveness,
efficiency, elegance and ethics at reproducing similar results
(usually by first acquiring the model themselves). Sometimes they then
facilitate others to acquire the model.

Acquirer

The person (usually including the modeller) who 'takes
on' the model and attempts to reproduce results similar to
those obtained by the exemplar. The acquisition process usually needs to be facilitated by an accompanying narrative, metaphors and activities.

Modelling

The process of gathering information from an exemplar,
constructing a model, and testing its effectiveness at
reproducing similar results (which requires someone to
have acquired it). See diagram below.

Modelling project

Both the plan for accomplishing the production and
acquisition of a model, and the implementation of that plan.
We distinguish five stages that do not necessarily happen in this order:

1. Preparing to model

2. Gathering information

3. Constructing a model

4. Testing the model

5. Acquiring the model

Self-modelling

The process of a person constructing a model of how they
achieve the results they get.

Facilitating the exemplar to
self-model in Stage 2 is often a very efficient way of
gathering information. At Stages 3 and 4, the modeller
self-models as a way of making explicit the out-of-awareness
information they have gathered. During Stage 5, the acquirer
can self-model as a way of monitoring their response to
acquiring an unfamiliar model.

[NOTE: A light bulb moment occurred when we grasped the implication of Michael Brean's statement (at the London NLP Group in about 1993): "All modelling is self-modelling."]

Five Stages of a Modelling Project

Fundamental or universal ways humans make sense of the world

'Experience' is a unified whole. Yet to
be conscious of our map of
the world we categorise, evaluate,
compare, decide, reason, intuit,
etc. These processes require us
to delete, distort and generalise
(Bandler & Grinder). The most
common way to do this is to
use one domain - usually our
everyday experience of the physical
world - to make sense of another
domain, usually the non-physical
world. In other words, we use
metaphor (Lakoff & Johnson). The
most commonly used metaphors,
which appear to form the basis of all
languages, are:

Space

Relative location.

Time

Sequence of events defined by a before, a
during, and an
after.

Schematic
of a Sequence of Events

Form

The attributes or qualities by which
something is
perceived, and at the same time, distinguished
from other
things, i.e. how it is known. The content of our
perceptions.

Perceiver

The someone who is perceiving the
something. To do this
the perceiver needs a 'means of
perceiving' (seeing,
hearing, feeling and other ways of
sensing) and a 'point of
perception' (where the perception
is perceived from). The
perceiver is therefore always in a
certain relationship with
the form of the perceived within a
given context (time and
space).

[Note: This model is
our synthesis
of
David Grove's "Observer-Observed-Relationship between" and
John McWhirter's "FROM-TO-IN" models.]

Level

Levels are a means of ordering and categorising experience in a hierarchy. They are
therefore usually referred to as 'Levels of' something e.g. Learning, Organization, Abstraction, Explanation, etc.

How to do a Modelling Project - Section 4

Stage 1: Preparing

Your first task is to define your modelling project by specifying
its:

Overall Outcome

What examples of excellence (impressive results) have you noticed other people
achieve in the world that you would like to achieve?

Sensory specific evidence of completion

How will you (and others) know you have got these
results?

Scope of project - what is included and what is not

Time scale

Contexts in which you (and others) want the results

Definition of terms

Value to you

What's important to you about being able
to consistently reproduce the results specified above?

Exemplars

Who consistently demonstrate the results you want?

What is your evidence that they are exemplars (of excellence)?

How will you get access to such people?

Be careful how you define your criteria for an exemplar. One modeller discovered the organisation that commissioned the work picked their 'top performers' by how much they contributed to the 'top line' (revenue). The modelling revealed that some achieved it at the expense of others – they burned relationships – and were not building the collaborate culture the organisation wanted.

Presuppositions

What are you presupposing to be true
before you start? (And what happens if you don't?)

What metaphors are you using to describe your project?

How do you describe the project to exemplars' with minimal presupposition and metaphor? (Hint: think context and behavioural examples.)

Your second task, is to plan how you are going to gather the
relevant information. To help you do that, see: Introducing Modelling to
Organisations. It contains a chart, The Who, Why, How, What, Where and
When of Modelling which uses two of Robert Dilts' frameworks to
consider a modelling project from a number of perceptual positions
and Logical Levels.

It is important to distinguish between different types of
information gathered from the exemplar. The following five are in
descending order of reliability of information:

i. Observed behaviour with sufficient repetitions to
indicate a pattern

ii. Observed behaviour with insufficient repetitions to indicate a
pattern

iii. 'Relived' descriptions or role-playing by the exemplar of
what they do

iv. Explanation by the exemplar (i.e. the exemplar's conscious
model of what they do)

v. Second-hand descriptions*

* Sometimes, the experiences of those who interact with the exemplar are valuable, e.g. Cricket Kemp and Caitlin Walker modelled teachers who were especially adept at working in multi-cultural classrooms. Some of the key pieces of their model came from interviewing the pupils.

Ways to gather information

The general rule is, the closer (and more often) you get to
observe the exemplar achieving the results in their 'natural
habitat' the better

Video/audio tapes, or material written by the exemplar that demonstrates achieving the required results

Face-to-face interview

Role-plays and mini-scenarios

Questionnaires

'Unofficial' observations

Written information edited or co-written by someone else

Description by someone else, e.g. biography.

While gathering information it is preferable that you have first-hand examples of the
exemplar's behaviour-in-context so that your questions
are asked from within the frames and logic of the exemplar's experience.

High-quality modelling questions tend to:

Relate to the project outcome

Make minimal presuppositions about the content of the exemplar's
map

Be short and contain a minimal number of non-exemplar words

Be simple and ask for one class of experience at a time

Invite the exemplar to remain in the appropriate state to
demonstrate what they do, i.e. in the 'perceptual present'

Not ask the exemplar's attention to jump too far (in space or
time)

Not get 'no' or disagreement for an answer.

Start from what the exemplar consciously knows, move towards the boundary
of what is already known, before stretching that boundary into
areas of the yet-to-be-aware-of (i.e. tacit knowledge).

A Modeller's Perspective

One vital aspect of modelling rarely made explicit is the perspective
adopted by the modeller when modelling an exemplar for an ability or
pattern of behaviour. There are a surprisingly large number of modeller
perspectives to choose from. This blog describes six: A Modeller's Perspective[added Feb 2014].

Traditional Modelling Questions

Every question directs the exemplar's attention to some where,
when or what in their mindbody map. So it is vital to consider:

What kind of information am I going for?

Where does the exemplar's attention need to go to access that information?

How simply [cleanly] can I ask for that information?

Did I get the kind of information I was going for?

The following are examples of some commonly used modelling questions:

Identifying

How do you know …?

Context

Where do you ...? When do you ...? Under what circumstances do you ... / does ... happen?

Intention

For what purpose do you ...?

Operations

How do you normally go about ...? How specifically do you do …? What's the first thing you do …? Then what do you do? What do you do next? What do you need to do to …?

Evidence/Test

How do you know you are (achieving) …? How do you know you have (achieved) …? What let's you know to ...? What do you see, hear and/or feel that lets you know …?

Motivation/Enablers

What's important to you about …? What makes it possible for you to …? What does … lead to or make possible?

Exceptions

What do you do if it doesn't go well / doesn't work? How do you know to stop trying to (achieve) …?Under what circumstances would you not ...?

In addition to the above, David Grove’s Clean Language is ideal for modelling because it …

Makes maximum use of an exemplar’s terminology.

Conforms to the logic and presuppositions of an exemplar’s constructs.

Only introduces ‘universal’ metaphors of form, space and time.

Only use nonverbals congruent with an exemplar’s nonverbals.

Basic Clean Language modelling questions

[ ] = Exemplar's exact words

Identify

And how do you know [ ]? And that's [ ] like what?

Develop Form

And what kind of [ ] is that [ ]? And is there anything else about [ ]? And where/whereabouts is [ ]?

Relate over Time

And what happens just before [event]? And then what happens? or And what happens next?

Relate across Space

And when/as [X], what happens to [Y]?

Specialised Clean Language modelling questionsused only when the logic of a client’s metaphor permits:

Identify

And what determines whether [X] or [Y]? And what needs to happen for [event]? And is there anything else that needs to happen for [event]?

Develop Form

And what happening [location/event]? And does [an 'it'] have a size or a shape? And how many [group] are there? And in which direction is/does [movement]? And where is [perceiver] [perceiving word] that from?

Relate over Time/across Space

And where does [ ] come from? And is [X] the same or different as/to [Y]? And is there a relationship between [X] and [Y]? And what's between [X] and [Y]?And what happens between [event X] and [event Y]?

.

How to do a Modelling Project - Section 6

Stage 3: Constructing Your Model

When modelling multiple exemplars for a class of experience, one
process for constructing your general model is to:

1. Describe from their perspective and in their
words how each exemplar does what they do
to get the required results; i.e. construct models for each exemplar using their descriptions.

2. Evaluate each model for:

Completeness - It has all necessary
distinctions/components. It answers 'what else?' questions with "nothing".

Coherency - The relationships between components adhere to
an internal logic. It answers 'why?' questions from within its own logic.

Consistency - It will get similar results even when circumstances change. It can answer 'what if?' questions.

* You can evaluate the above by the degree to which your model
shows 'operational closure'–

When no new components or patterns emerge and the exemplar's
descriptions add no further information about how that operational
unit works.

When new components or examples continue to appear but they
are isomorphic (have the same function or organisation) as
previously identified patterns.

When the logic of the exemplar's description encompasses an
entire configuration, a complete sequence or a coherent set of
premises (with no logical gaps).

When the model enables you to predict ways of dealing with
unexpected situations, difficulties, interference or distractions
that have yet to be mentioned by the exemplar.

When you repeat or demonstrate the operational unit to the
exemplar, and they acknowledge 'that's it, you got it'.

At this point you start to separate the information gathered from the
exemplar: It is no longer their model, it becomes your model because
you will represent the information in a different way to meet your modelling outomes.

4. Design your own model using one or more of the following
methods.

a. Identify similarities across exemplars and
construct a composite model based on similarities.

b. Use one of the models as a prototype and improve it by
adding/substituting distinctions/components/steps from the other
models.

c. Deconstruct the individual models into the function of each
component/stage and construct a new model from the bottom-up.

d. Adapt existing models from other contexts that are
compatible with the model you are constructing, and use them as the
framework for your model (e.g. 'transformational grammar' was the
basis for the Meta Model, and 'self-organising systems theory' formed
the framework for Symbolic Modelling).

5. Evaluate and improve your model based on the degree to
which it is:

Effective - It gets similar results to the
exemplars.

Efficient - It requires the least number of
steps/components (use Occam's Razor to make it "as simple as possible, but no
simpler").

Elegant - It is code congruent, i.e. the content of the model, the manner in which it is presented/coded and the means of getting the results are congruent.

Ethical - The effects are aligned with your and others' existing or desired values.

[NOTE: We borrowed the first three E's from John McWhirter and added the fourth ourselves]

And, evaluate whether distinctions/components are necessary by the
degree to which each is:

Effective - contributes to the overall outcome
of the model.

Efficient - serves multiple functions.

Elegant - fits into the overall coherency (internal code
congruency) and enhances the consistency (external code congruency)
of the model. It is compatible and aligned with:

Exemplar's cannot not do their patterns of excellence. A key aspect of modelling is to determine how an
exemplar keeps achieving the same results even under changing circumstances. How is it that they cannot
not do it? How come they don't forget to do it? How do they adjust
for unfavourable circumstances and still get consistently
excellent results? In other words, how come it's habitual? This
information will not be in any of the components, but in the pattern
of relationships between perceptual components. It will likely be the
circular chains of relationships (Bateson) that keep the pattern
repeating. And if so, your model needs to have comparable circular chains.

You can consider 'Is there any way I can I run
this model and do something else?' and 'Under what circumstances
would I not get the required results?'. Adapting your model to
take these circumstances into account will make it more robust, and more
consistent.

Except when, under inappropriate or extreme conditions, the pattern breaks down. At these times a values or ethical threshold is often involved. What are those conditions and
what do exemplars do then? Bateson warned that any behaviour taken to extremes will become toxic. What are you own values and ethical limits with regard to using this model? These are non-trivial questions that we believe need to be openly and honestly faced.

How to do a Modelling Project - Section 7

Stage 4: Testing your Model

Different forms of testing occur throughout the modelling process. The primary purpose of testing is to get feedback from:

The exemplars
Yourself
The 'real world'
Other acquirers

Testing your model with the exemplar

a. Test the components and steps of your model for accuracy.

As you gather information from your exemplar you can recap (in their words) as much of your model of their behaviours, abilities and states as you have. This will give them a chance to evaluate your description for accuracy.

Use your sensory acuity to calibrate that the pace of your
description enables the exemplar to 'try on' your model of them so they can compare it to their own experience, component-by-component
and step-by-step.

Every response you get from your exemplar is feedback as to
the accuracy of your model. They are the world's expert on
their model, and at this stage, that's what you are attempting
to reproduce. Anything they think is confusing, illogical, or that
doesn't fit, is a signal that your model is incomplete.

b. Test the logic of your model for accuracy

After you have confirmation of the accuracy of your
model from the exemplar, you can start to make predictions as to how
the exemplar has or would 'run' their model in some as yet
unspecified context.

The aim is to test if your understanding of the exemplar's logic
enables you to go beyond what you have been specifically told or
observed.

Testing your model on your own

'Try on' your model by 'running it through' your system

Can you run the model - from 'before', when the starting
Test criteria are triggered, through 'during' the
Operations, until the ending Test criteria are met, and on
to Exit 'after' (TOTE model)?

Would you expect to get the required results?

Does it all fit together?

Can you break it - under what conditions would you not get the
required results?

Are there other contexts where the process would also be applicable?

At this stage you are acquiring the model 'for the moment'.
You are not seeking to integrate it with any other models,
instead you 'put them aside' while you run your tests. In other
words, you are self-modelling to obtain feedback from your own system.

Testing the model for real

Having tested your model with the exemplar, and used your own
neurology as a test bed, your outcome changes. You now seek to
test for the degree to which you can reproduce the required
results. You want to compare the results you get with the results your
exemplars get. To do this you need feedback from the external world.
Two ways to do this are:

a. Prepare safe 'test conditions'

Taking into account the ecology of the wider system
and depending on the potential effects of your model not working, you
may want to establish some 'test conditions' in which to test the model's
efficacy and your competency.

b. Go 'live'

The ultimate personal test. Can you get similar
results to your exemplars under similar conditions? And can you do
that consistently and under a variety of conditions? (Steve Andreas
has said that when he constructs a new model for change, i.e. a new
NLP technique, he has to test it out with 20-30 clients before he is
confident he has ironed out the majority of creases.)

Remember, your model may work perfectly but you may not yet have
enough background knowledge or experience of running it to get the
same results as your exemplars. Acquiring Einstein's problem solving
strategy won't make you an Einstein overnight, but you can expect it
to give you access to a different way of thinking about problems and
to a wider range of solutions than you had before.

Other acquirers testing the model

If your modelling project is for other people (who were
not involved in Stages 2-4), your outcome
for testing changes again. Your design for an acquisition process
(Stage 5) should include testing by the acquirers. The feedback you
want now is: To what degree are the results the acquirers get
similar to those achieved by the exemplars.

Over the history of NLP the metaphors used to
describe Stage 5 have changed from:

Installation of the model by the modeller in the acquirer
toTransmission of the model by the modeller to the acquirer
toAcquisition of the model by the acquirer (facilitated by the
modeller).

Interestingly, these changes seem to parallel
a general trend within NLP; that is, the focus of the
practitioner-client relationship is moving away from the practitioner
and towards the client. We support this trend, since our preference is for
the acquirer (to be facilitated) to self-model their own process of
acquiring.

Acquiring presents a paradox: The exemplar
gets their results largely through unconscious processes, but the
acquirer initially acquires the model and uses it consciously. This
is a double paradox when the skill being modelled has to be
unconscious, e.g. an intuitive signal.

Generalised process for acquisition

Starting with a thorough understanding and
experience of using your model:

1. Gather information about the
acquirer's outcome, the context where they want the required results, their existing map in relation to the model to be
acquired, and their learning preferences.

2. Where possible, modify your model to align
with the acquirer's existing map as long as the integrity and essence of your model is retained.

3. Design an acquisition process that
includes multiple descriptions and is congruent with both the model
and the exemplar's map.

4. Facilitate (or make available) the
acquisition process.

5. Utilise acquirers responses - preferably
in the moment - as feedback to adapt the process of acquisition to acquirer's model of the world and metaphors.

6. Test: to what degree do results
acquirers get match those of the exemplar?

Some ways to present your model to an
acquirer are to:

Enact the activity of each step
of the sequence

Map components, their location, their functions and their
relationships

Chart the flow of information and decision
points

Physicalise or use non-verbal metaphor
(Dance/Movement)

Tell stories and analogies

Write descriptions and give examples

Facilitating the acquisition
process

It may surprise you to realise that your primary aim is not for the acquirer to
acquire your model. Your model is only a means to an end. Your joint
aim is for the acquirer to be able to reproduce results similar to that of the original exemplar(s).

As much as possible the acquirer needs to
fully experience the model as they acquire it. So pay attention to and calibrate
whether the acquirer is replicating the model in their own mind-space
and body. i.e.

Do they describe it in the correct
order?

Do they gesture, look and move as specified
by the model?

Do they use the same or equivalent
descriptions and metaphors?

Not all components of the model will be
equally important for the acquirer to acquire. Often a single piece
will make a big difference. But you are unlikely to know in advance which one!

Acquiring is an iterative process. Acquirers
need both big chunk information (how the model all fits together as a
whole and its purpose) and small chunk information (what to
do).

Different acquirers will prefer to start with
different aspects of the model. For example, they might first like to
get know all the bits and what they do; or how the bits fit together
and relate to each other; or the order in which things happen; or
where and how they can use it.

Time, repetition, multiple descriptions and feedback
are useful co-teachers.

Common responses to acquisition

According to Gordon & Dawes there are 5
common ways people do not acquire a new model (assuming they want
to). In effect the acquirer indicates:

I can't get out of my present
model

I can't get into the new model

I can't make sense of the model

I am concerned about the consequences of
taking on the model

The model does not fit with who I am

One way to respectfully respond to this type
of feedback is to facilitate the acquirer to self-model what is
happening that means they are not acquiring the model (including how
you are presenting it):

1. Fully acknowledge the way it
is for them.

2. Confirm that they still want to achieve
the required results.

3. Facilitate them to discover:

Where is there a mismatch between the
existing and the new model?

What is making that mismatch possible and
what is maintaining it?

Have they been in a similar situation and what did they do then?

What needs to happen to resolve it
now?

What other metaphors/descriptions/representational
systems will enable the acquirer to achieve the required
results?

What are other circumstances where they could
use the model?

What knowledge, skills or
experiences need to be in place that will ease the acquirers' acquisition process?

Notes on Expert to Novice Acquisition

By definition, exemplars are
experts while acquirers are novices (cf. Dreyfus & Dreyfus).

Your exemplar will have years of experience and lots of unconscious
habitual strategies. With so much happening unconsciously, the
exemplar has spare capacity to pay (conscious) attention to other
things that are happening. For example, comprehending language is a completely
unconscious process for a native speaker, and hence they can attend
to puns, patterns, double meanings and all sorts of subtle
communication that is not available to the novice second-language
learner. (cf. Gregory Bateson: as behaviour is repeated it becomes
ever more deeply embedded in the organism, i.e. pushed down the
levels of organisation.)

An acquirer does not have the same
level of experience and so the acquisition process has to act as a
bridge from the novice's way of doing things to the expert's way of doing things. To do
this you may well need to add in some extra steps that are not part
of your exemplar's model. The NLP
Spelling Strategy is a good
example (Joseph O'Connor and John Seymour, Introducing
NLP, 1990, p.182). This model includes a step where the acquirer spells the
word they are learning backwards despite the fact expert spellers
never do this. So why is it is in the strategy?

When the modellers first tried to teach the
spelling strategy to poor spellers, they found that even though they learned
it, they did not believe this was enough to become a good speller. So
someone had the bright idea of getting them to spell the words they
were learning backwards on the basis that "If you can spell the word
backwards, you know spelling it forwards will be easy." This extra 'convincer' step was
added to make the
spelling strategy more effective. (A second advantage of the backwards spelling step is that it
allows the facilitator to very easily calibrate whether the acquirer
is using the required visual accessing or reverting to the less
efficient auditory method - with the latter it is really difficult to
spell words backwards.)

So, you might need to add extra
steps to prepare an acquirer to access a state that the exemplar
switches into naturally. For example, Penny Tompkins was modelled for
her ability to "notice a client's nonverbal cues and subtle
presuppositions of logic" when she is in therapy or coaching mode.
Penny can instantly "clear my mind" and be in a very open and
receptive state. She suggested that if someone else wanted to acquire
her noticing ability but couldn't take on her instant process, they might modify the SWISH technique so
that they could temporarily move away all the stuff that is present for them
until it is a dot on the horizon, and in its place bring back a
"clear space" in which the client and their stuff
can be situated. Although this is not how Penny does it, it would probably have the same effect.

How to do a Modelling Project - Section 9

References:

Most NLP books are about the results of modelling projects,
not about the modelling process itself. For example, the first five
(pre-NLP) books by John Grinder & Richard Bandler (and others)
were the product of their modelling. You have to read between the
lines to infer the process of modelling they used.

Leslie Cameron-Bandler, David
Gordon & Michael Lebeau
wrote The Emprint Method: A Guide to Reproducing Competence in
order "to provide you with tools that will enable you to identify and
acquire (or transfer to others) desirable human aptitudes."
Although David Gordon now says it is really about modelling emotional
competence. (Real People Press, 1985)

Judith DeLozier's
account of her and John
Grinder's modelling of people who have completed
interesting modelling projects can be found in Turtles All The Way
Down (Grinder, DeLozier & Associates, 1987).

Also see her article 'Mastery,
New
Coding, and Systemic NLP' in NLP World (Vol. 2 No. 1,
March 1995) which has a brief description of a "not knowing" state that is
excellent for "intuitive modelling".

For a short and simple introduction to strategy elicitation,
see chapter 4 of Charlotte Bretto's, A Framework for
Excellence (Grinder, DeLozier & Associates, 1988).

Charlotte Bretto Millner, John Grinder and Sylvia Topel edited an excellent book Leaves Before the Wind: Leading Edge Applications of NLP (Metamorphous Press, 1991/1994) includes the results of some fascinating modelling projects.

Anthony Robbins has a very readable couple of chapters on
modelling strategies in Unlimited Power (Simon & Schuster,
1988).

Robert Dilts & Todd Epstein's Tools For Dreamers is packed with micro and macro processes for modelling with
lots of examples of strategies for creativity (Meta Publications,
1991).

Robert Dilts. His three volumes, Strategies of Genius
Volumes I, II & III are the definitive work on "conceptual
modelling", especially when your exemplar is an historic figure.
(Meta Publications, 1994/1995)

John Grinder & Frank Pucelik (Editors) Origins Of Neuro Linguistic Programming (Crown House, 2013). If you read between the lines you can discern much on how the original modelling gave rise to NLPin the early 1970's.

Fran Burgess has made a mammoth contribution to the field by publishing The Bumper Bundle Book of Modelling (2014) and it's sister, The Bumper Bundle Companion Workbook: They are the result of 15 years observing many leading modellers first-hand. It is the first publication which provides an extensive compilation and comparison of a number of modelling methodologies used in NLP.

How to do a Modelling Project - Section 10

Modelling Methodologies

The list below contains modelling methodologies that to varying degrees we have had first-hand experience although we would not claim to be experts in any (ok, maybe Symbolic Modelling!).

Penny and James are supervising neurolinguistic psychotherapists – registered with the United Kingdom Council for Psychotherapy since 1993 – coaches in business, certified NLP trainers, and founders of The Developing Company.They have provided
consultancy to organisations as diverse as GlaxoSmithKline, Yale
University Child Study Center, NASA Goddard Space Center and the
Findhorn Spiritual Community in Northern Scotland.